VoIP Reliability White Paper 102604
VoIP Reliability White Paper 102604
VoIP Reliability White Paper 102604
Voice over IP
Reliability
Architecture Matters
Comparing Three Different Approaches to Delivering 99.999% Availability
Phone service is like air in today’s businesses: Its constant availability is both required
and assumed. This state of affairs has arisen from more than a century of efforts by the
makers of traditional voice switches to develop systems that are available at least
99.999% of the time. Concerns that voice over IP (VoIP) may not offer this vaunted “five
nines” availability has been one of the major impediments to convergence.
Today’s VoIP solutions fall into three basic categories: Systems evolved from traditional
PBX platforms, systems evolved from traditional data-switch platforms, and systems
designed from the ground up for VoIP. All three of these architectures can be used to
deliver VoIP systems with five-nines reliability, but they involve different degrees of
complexity and cost. In this paper, we will examine the effects that these different
architectures have upon the ability to deliver IP-based voice systems that are both highly
available and cost effective.
The manufacturers of legacy voice systems have a great history of delivering extremely
reliable voice switches, and in fact are responsible for the 99.999% availability standard
that VoIP solutions must match or exceed. However, legacy PBXes and key systems are
hierarchical voice silos that operate independently at each location in a multi-site
company. They cannot back each other up or be managed as a single voice network, and
create a single point of failure at each site.
The VoIP solutions that have been evolved out of these legacy voice switches have
inherited some of the inherent fragmentation of this centralized and hierarchical
architecture.
The result is switches that operate more like separate silos than elements of a single voice
system. This fragmented architecture cripples one of the key benefits of VoIP: the ability
to create a single voice system that is distributed across multiple sites and can cover for
individual switches that fail. It can also increase costs. Each of the silos may still require
outsourced management and maintenance by a local teleconnect, just as their circuit-
switched predecessors did. There may also be licensing issues to consider.
The term “convergence” sounds like a merger of roughly equal parties, but in the
voice/data arena it is actually more of an acquisition. Voice is being turned into another
network application, albeit a very important one. Given this fundamental truth, it is
tempting to assume that the established data-switch vendors have an architectural edge as
they develop VoIP platforms. However, the data world carries some legacy baggage of its
own.
To begin with, while voice does not require much bandwidth, each conversation has to be
maintained in a constant stream with strict latency thresholds for acceptable voice
quality. Data traffic is very forgiving of latency, and the switches were designed to burst
massive amounts of data through as quickly as possible.
The data-switch vendors approach VoIP by taking these basic, data-optimized Ethernet
switch platforms and embedding some technology into them. Call control is implemented
in a separate centralized server located in a data center. This centralized server is
fundamental to the set up and tear down of all calls to, from, or between IP phones at all
the company’s different sites, so it creates a single point of failure. Multiple call-control
servers can be purchased at additional expense and clustered together to provide fault
tolerance, but this centralized architecture still assumes that the IP backbone connecting
the various offices is always available.
IP networks are inherently distributed and resilient, and VoIP architects starting with a
blank slate can exploit this fundamental strength to create a self-healing voice platform.
A truly unified voice system can be distributed across multiple sites by using a simple
peer-to-peer architecture that has no single point of failure. IP voice switches designed
specifically for voice can each incorporate a complete call processor — even small
models aimed at remote offices requiring eight ports or less. Each switch is a peer with a
full complement of routing information safely held in local flash memory, and can
operate as a standalone PBX if its site is cut off from the IP backbone. It can make best-
effort calls on its own, using a failover PSTN trunk if necessary. When switches are
added or restored to the network, they and the existing switches at all the sites
automatically discover each other and start working together.
Reliability thus comes built in with this approach, and the five-nines availability
requirement for voice is easily met. In fact, it can be increased to ten nines by installing a
redundant switch with PSTN access at each site. A native VoIP architecture thus has
built-in autonomy and survivability. Delivering a system that is reliable and highly
available doesn’t have to involve additional cost or complexity.
Conclusion
When disruptive technologies start to emerge, established vendors always look at the new
landscape through the lens of the world they currently dominate. The architectures they
come up with are limited or even crippled by this legacy. We all know that computers,
generally speaking, have not been as reliable as phones, and there is still a lot of FUD
(Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) circulating about VoIP. And in fact, there have been VoIP
implementations that cannot be called reliable.
However, there is no longer any question that highly available VoIP systems can be
delivered on any of the three basic architectures discussed in this paper. It is now a
question of how such reliability is achieved, not whether it can be achieved. For VoIP
solutions built on what is essentially a legacy voice or legacy data foundation, each
additional nine in the availability rating comes at the expense of a lot more complexity
and resources. For a voice system that is VoIP by design—mimicking the resilience of IP
networks with a peer-to-peer communications architecture, and with autonomous call
management built into each voice switch—it comes very naturally.
www.shoretel.com